29107 réponses à ce sujet

[TheodoricFriede]

At the very least Ragabul we can agree that the ironic deaths just didn't "fit".

[oenis]

I agree with the 'poetic justice' theory and 'dev lulz' that explain the dossier. As with Dr. Heart, Garrus likes the punishment to fit the crime. He suggested harvesting Heart's organs not to be cruel necessarily, but to avenge the victims that had been used as test subjects. The dossiers aren't specific but nothing Garrus has done leads me to think he's cruel. Impulsive, yes. He is quick to anger, like with Harkin, but I think it comes from his deep desire to make sure justice is done.

[Sialater]

The thing about the surgical strikes... I think it was in reference to trying not to cause civilian casualties. I don't think it was in regards to being extra merciful to the "bad guys."



However... I honestly wonder if you can really believe anything the Shadow Broker dug up.



BUT, if the SB isn't playing fast and loose with the truth, a Red Sand Overdose in a species that is supposed to be immune to its effects would be possible. It would a) depend on what the drug was cut with, depend on what the "immunity" entailed. If batarians couldn't get the temporary biotic abilities, but the drug was still somewhat poisonous to them for whatever reason... an OD would still work. Since I haven't DL'ed the thing yet, can y'all tell me if in fact, there's an indication beyond a doubt that Garrus himself was responsible for the painful deaths involved in the batarian and the quarian, or if another team member did it and Garrus just "recorded it for posterity?"



Because yes, the brutality strikes me as out of character for Garrus as currently presented. Unless they're trying to say that without Paragon Shep around, Garrus loses his way?

[Nilfalasiel]

Sialater wrote...

The thing about the surgical strikes... I think it was in reference to trying not to cause civilian casualties. I don't think it was in regards to being extra merciful to the "bad guys."

Maybe so, but he still doesn't kill Saleon or Sidonis in a strictly "eye for an eye" way, he simply shoots them, in a quick, expeditive manner. And he doesn't kill Harkin. So I don't find it implausible that he wouldn't go out of his way to be extra nasty to the "bad guys" either.

However... I honestly wonder if you can really believe anything the Shadow Broker dug up.

Why not? The whole point behind the SB is that he essentially blackmails all parties involved to keep a level playing field. This wouldn't work if his information wasn't actually true. Besides, if we were supposed to doubt this info, then we'd have to doubt the fact that Garrus even has a sister.

BUT, if the SB isn't playing fast and loose with the truth, a Red Sand Overdose in a species that is supposed to be immune to its effects would be possible. It would a) depend on what the drug was cut with, depend on what the "immunity" entailed. If batarians couldn't get the temporary biotic abilities, but the drug was still somewhat poisonous to them for whatever reason... an OD would still work. Since I haven't DL'ed the thing yet, can y'all tell me if in fact, there's an indication beyond a doubt that Garrus himself was responsible for the painful deaths involved in the batarian and the quarian, or if another team member did it and Garrus just "recorded it for posterity?"

It's not specified that Garrus himself killed these guys. It just says "noted criminal deaths on Omega". However, considering that at least 3 were caused by headshots, it's safe to assume that Garrus was responsible for at least those. But even if Garrus himself didn't kill these guys, I don't think he would've let his squaddies torture them either.

Because yes, the brutality strikes me as out of character for Garrus as currently presented. Unless they're trying to say that without Paragon Shep around, Garrus loses his way?

That would be an annoying throwback to the "Garrus can't do anything right on his own" idea. I can accept the deaths if they occurred in the heat of battle, or, in the quarian's case, by accident. If they occurred in a more deliberate manner (eg. tying the batarian down and dumping red sand on his head), then yes, I'd have an issue with that.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 21 septembre 2010 - 02:40 .

[J4N3_M3]

Sialater wrote...

However... I honestly wonder if you can really believe anything the Shadow Broker dug up.

actually, I do believe the Shadow Broker had mostly well-grounded information. His whole career was based on that. After all, it was his business dealing with information so I think we can trust the stuff he had about everyone from the team. I know that I do. He may have been an **** who tried to give Shepard to the Collectors because of the offer they made him but he never claimed to be a good person anyway.

Modifié par J4N3_M3, 21 septembre 2010 - 02:33 .

[Sialater]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

Sialater wrote...

The thing about the surgical strikes... I think it was in reference to trying not to cause civilian casualties. I don't think it was in regards to being extra merciful to the "bad guys."

Maybe so, but he still doesn't kill Saleon or Sidonis in a strictly "eye for an eye" way, he simply shoots them, in a quick, expeditive manner. And he doesn't kill Harkin. So I don't find it implausible that he wouldn't go out of his way to be extra nasty to the "bad guys" either.

However... I honestly wonder if you can really believe anything the Shadow Broker dug up.

Why not? The whole point behind the SB is that he essentially blackmails all parties involved to keep a level playing field. This wouldn't work if his information wasn't actually true. Besides, if we were supposed to doubt this info, then we'd have to doubt the fact that Garrus even has a sister.

BUT, if the SB isn't playing fast and loose with the truth, a Red Sand Overdose in a species that is supposed to be immune to its effects would be possible. It would a) depend on what the drug was cut with, depend on what the "immunity" entailed. If batarians couldn't get the temporary biotic abilities, but the drug was still somewhat poisonous to them for whatever reason... an OD would still work. Since I haven't DL'ed the thing yet, can y'all tell me if in fact, there's an indication beyond a doubt that Garrus himself was responsible for the painful deaths involved in the batarian and the quarian, or if another team member did it and Garrus just "recorded it for posterity?"

It's not specified that Garrus himself killed these guys. It just says "noted criminal deaths on Omega". However, considering that at least 3 were caused by headshots, it's safe to assume that Garrus was responsible for at least those. But even if Garrus himself didn't kill these guys, I don't think he would've let his squaddies torture them either.

Because yes, the brutality strikes me as out of character for Garrus as currently presented. Unless they're trying to say that without Paragon Shep around, Garrus loses his way?

That would be an annoying throwback to the "Garrus can't do anything right on his own" idea. I can accept the deaths if they occurred in the heat of battle, or, in the quarian's case, by accident. If they occurred in a more deliberate manner, then yes, I'd have an issue with that.

I'm not quite as good as you at the quotes, Nilf.   I agree with you in that he's more likely to prefer just getting the job done, rather than reveling in the torture.  

I tend to suspect all bad guys of being duplicitous. Makes conspiracy theories fun.

Garrus may have been in charge, doesn't mean he was johnny-on-the-spot for those incidents and was too late to do anything about the methods of his team.  The humans, at least, would operate under the principle of "tis far better to ask forgiveness than permission."  We don't know the circumstances under which those two brutal deaths occured.  I agree the head shots, however, scream Garrus' handiwork.

I really hope they wouldn't be trying to say that, but playing devil's advocate is sometimes necessary.

[J4N3_M3]

Another possibility is that someone else killed all these people and Garrus was after him. Maybe Cerberus was behind those kills and Garrus was doing his own investigation. Maybe some other reason. After all, all the victims were aliens.

[Sialater]

J4N3_M3 wrote...

Another possibility is that someone else killed all these people and Garrus was after him. Maybe Cerberus was behind those kills and Garrus was doing his own investigation. Maybe some other reason. After all, all the victims were aliens.

Oooh!  I wanna chalk it all up to Cerberus!  Pretty please with Garrus on top?

[Nilfalasiel]

Sialater wrote...

J4N3_M3 wrote...

Another possibility is that someone else killed all these people and Garrus was after him. Maybe Cerberus was behind those kills and Garrus was doing his own investigation. Maybe some other reason. After all, all the victims were aliens.

Oooh!  I wanna chalk it all up to Cerberus!  Pretty please with Garrus on top?

Lol. Nah, the 3 headshots = Garrus.

[J4N3_M3]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

Sialater wrote...

J4N3_M3 wrote...

Another possibility is that someone else killed all these people and Garrus was after him. Maybe Cerberus was behind those kills and Garrus was doing his own investigation. Maybe some other reason. After all, all the victims were aliens.

Oooh!  I wanna chalk it all up to Cerberus!  Pretty please with Garrus on top?

Lol. Nah, the 3 headshots = Garrus.

why? Garrus is not the only person with sniper skills ya know?

Modifié par J4N3_M3, 21 septembre 2010 - 03:29 .

[J4N3_M3]

mrsph wrote...

Not enough dead Cerberus operatives to be Cerberus.

of course not! but maybe he wanted to take these criminals out himself and someone was quicker so he noted their deaths to see if they were somehow linked. that's what I was getting at.

[Nilfalasiel]

J4N3_M3 wrote...

why? Garrus is not the only person with sniper skills ya know?

I think it's too far-fetched for this to be in Garrus' dossier and yet designate some mysterious stranger who just happens to also be a sniper and also hunt criminals on Omega. It's certainly more far-fetched than thinking that Garrus could've killed all those targets without necessarily being cruel or intending to torture them. At least, IMO.

"Suit malfunction" sounds like it could be another accident, btw. And one that might not actually be related to Garrus at all. Because to jack the guy's suit, you'd actually have to get pretty close to him. Note that it doesn't say "suit sabotage", just "malfunction".

'Course, it could also be the result of a well-placed Overload.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 21 septembre 2010 - 04:07 .

[Hazzel42]

I don't think it's really all that out of character for Garrus to have decided along with his team that the method of execution should match the crime for the criminals they went after on Omega. I think it was done not just out of a sense of justice and fairness for the victims of said criminals, but also to serve as a warning to others. The punishment of criminals is also supposed to act as a deterrent to prevent people from doing bad things. He comes from a different culture with very different views on crime and punishment. I don't think this supposedly cruel behaviour detracts from Garrus's nobility in any way. He's not supposed to be a saint. Besides as a vigilante he is creating his own set of rules for how to deal with criminals. I'm sure he didn't make all the decisions on how to deal with the criminals on his own either. I'm sure his team was involved in the decisions too, and who knows what happened at the actual moments. Garrus may not have been at every take down - perhaps the team split up in some cases. Without more info it's all speculation, but I still think the style fits Garrus.

[Nilfalasiel]

Hazzel42 wrote...

I don't think it's really all that out of character for Garrus to have decided along with his team that the method of execution should match the crime for the criminals they went after on Omega. I think it was done not just out of a sense of justice and fairness for the victims of said criminals, but also to serve as a warning to others. The punishment of criminals is also supposed to act as a deterrent to prevent people from doing bad things. He comes from a different culture with very different views on crime and punishment. I don't think this supposedly cruel behaviour detracts from Garrus's nobility in any way. He's not supposed to be a saint.

I agree that Garrus isn't a saint, but then what do you make of him simply shooting Sidonis? By this reasoning, he shouldn't just shoot him, he should beat him within an inch of his life, break his knees, put a bullet in his gut and leave him to die in a dark alley, because he's not just a criminal, he's a traitor. Garrus even says he deserves that. And yet he gives him a quick, merciful death, even if you let him take the shot straight away without letting him explain his motives. What matters to him is that Sidonis dies, not that he dies in the exact same way as his victims. Of course, if poetic justice can happen, I'm sure he'd view it as icing on the cake, but I don't see him going out of his way to set up some machiavellian plan to inflict said poetic justice because he considers it absolutely necessary.

Also, it's hard for me to see how forcibly putting drugs into someone's eyes until they OD is not cruel. Even if they're a criminal, mimicking their chosen methods of crime is NOT a good solution (by that reasoning, what would you do to a rapist?). I'm not saying Garrus is gentle and pure as the newborn babe, and he's certainly not above killing someone when they deserve it. But overtly elaborate methods to do so? That's skirting a very thin line, and it makes me uneasy. If Garrus shoots a crate of red sand that explodes in the batarian's face, I'd say "ha! got what was comin' to ya!". If Garrus catches the batarian and empties a crate of red sand on his head...I'd honestly give up on him.

That being said, it's true that we don't know how those kills went down, which is why I'm not going to assume the worst without any tangible proof. There are many ways they could have happened.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 21 septembre 2010 - 04:30 .

[danitiwa]

Hey guys, just thought I'd dump my idea for Garrus' sister Solana here. I'll do something about the awful background later.

[ciaweth]

That whole family needs hugs.

[Hazzel42]

I think that he was more interested in making sure Sidonis didn't get away again at that point. In the end he wants to see some sort of justice. If there's no time or opportunity for anything else then quick and simple would be better than no justice. He's also not inflexible as the paragon option demonstrates and willing to show some mercy under the right circumstances.

I don't think Garrus made all those decisions entirely on his own, but if he was the leader he must have had some final say, unless as I suggested earlier some of the "justice" was dispensed at the moment by some of the other members.

I think people tend to forget that Garrus is still alien and comes from a different culture with different ways of dealing with justice. What seems cruel to you may seem reasonable to him - it may be a way for the criminal to do some atoning before they die. After all there are victims who want to see their abuser suffer horribly. There are others who just want a quick end for their tormentor - it's all perspective (and possibly culture).

EDIT: typo

Modifié par Hazzel42, 21 septembre 2010 - 04:44 .

[Eradyn]

I love the punishments Garrus visited on the worst offenders and I certainly wouldn't lose sleep over them suffering. Not after the suffering they willingly caused. As for the quarian...if he's a serial killer who used viruses, it is true poetic justice that Garrus infected him and let him suffer what his victims suffered...and I bet Garrus used one if the quarian's own viruses against him.

[Hazzel42]

I agree - I love the poetic justice and think the deaths are fitting. I can totally see why and where Garrus would be coming from; still that's my own personal opinion. I know not everyone would feel that way.

[Nilfalasiel]

Hazzel42 wrote...

I think people tend to forget that Garrus is still alien and comes from a different culture with different ways of dealing with justice. What seems cruel to you may seem reasonable to him - it may be a way for the criminal to do some atoning before they die. After all there are victims who want to see their abuser suffer horribly. There are others who just want a quick end for their tormentor - it's all perspective (and possibly culture).

I'm not debating that, I'm just saying that, from what we've actually seen Garrus do, it doesn't seem in-character for him to deliberately make someone suffer in an elaborately cruel way. Even a criminal. I'm not saying it's impossible to want a criminal to suffer in general, only that Garrus doesn't seem to quite go that far in his reasoning. There's nothing markedly alien in his way of thinking, from what I've seen: I could perfectly well imagine a human behaving in the same way, it's all entirely comprehensible and justifiable. But I have not seen a propensity for cruelty in him. Anger, resentment, revenge, yes. But not cruelty.

But apparently, I'm in a minority on this one.  Oh well, 's all good.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 21 septembre 2010 - 05:51 .

[JulianP]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

Hazzel42 wrote...

I think people tend to forget that Garrus is still alien and comes from a different culture with different ways of dealing with justice. What seems cruel to you may seem reasonable to him - it may be a way for the criminal to do some atoning before they die. After all there are victims who want to see their abuser suffer horribly. There are others who just want a quick end for their tormentor - it's all perspective (and possibly culture).

I'm not debating that, I'm just saying that, from what we've actually seen Garrus do, it doesn't seem in-character for him to deliberately make someone suffer in an elaborately cruel way. Even a criminal. I'm not saying it's impossible to want a criminal to suffer in general, only that Garrus doesn't seem to quite go that far in his reasoning. There's nothing markedly alien in his way of thinking, from what I've seen: I could perfectly well imagine a human behaving in the same way, it's all entirely comprehensible and justifiable. But I have not seen a propensity for cruelty in him. Anger, resentment, revenge, yes. But not cruelty.

But apparently, I'm in a minority on this one.  Oh well, 's all good.

I'm somewhere in between on this issue I guess, but wow, this thread has gotten intense lately!  Nilf, the previous evidence you cited was pretty persuasive, though.  He's willing to rough people up when angry and I think some of that could conceivably be called cruel, but it is interesting that he hasn't actually gone all out with slow deaths and organ harvesting when he's had the chance.  As for Hazzel's culture idea, perhaps it's too bad we haven't had a lot of in-game evidence about turian justice.  We have general values we know are important to them, but there's not a lot of evidence. 

[Hazzel42]

I think he was quite clear in ME1 that he wanted to see Saleon suffer the same way his victims had but he'd settle for a quick death or if Shepard insisted incarceration. I even the desire to shoot Harkin in the leg (or settling for a serious head-butt) as his idea of suitable punishment, though in Harkin's case there's probably a bit of a personal grudge there too.



Still there's nothing to say that I'm right - I think there's plenty of room for interpretation and for Garrus to be viewed differently by everyone.